Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
allows for flexibly leveraging a much larger space of customization possibilities, leading
to systems that are better tailored to the exact needs of users. Thirdly, the proposed
approach implies minimum impact to the implementation process, being transparent
to the architectural, modularization, process and platform choices the engineers have
made, as long as two simple mapping principles are followed and the ability to maintain
and query the policy tree is arranged. Our application in the on-line cart system offered
us strong evidence that both the customization practice per se and the engineering and
development intervention that enables it are feasible and exhibit the above advantages.
Our proposal opens a variety of possibilities for future research. One of them is an
extended empirical investigation on the applicability and generality of our basic im-
plementation principles. Such empirical work also includes evaluating with end-users
the extent and manner by which they can construct customization desires of various
levels of complexity. Furthermore, application of the technique in a variety of system
types would allow better understanding of whether the current form of the policy tree
offers the right level of information or whether adding more expressiveness should be
attempted. This could include, for example, adaptation of the semantics of satisfaction
predicates so that task repetition also becomes subject to CF compliance or addition of
run-time instance-level information to the produced policy structure. Such extensions
would potentially allow for finer grain customization, but at the significant expense of
simplicity, of impact minimality to the design and of maintaining a modest computa-
tional cost.
References
1. Oreizy, P., Medvidovic, N., Taylor, R.N.: Architecture-based runtime software evolution. In:
Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 1998),
Washington, DC, USA, pp. 177-186 (1998)
2. Kramer, J., Magee, J.: Self-managed systems: an architectural challenge. In: Future of Soft-
ware Engineering (FOSE 2007), Washington, DC, USA, pp. 259-268 (2007)
3. Liaskos, S., McIlraith, S.A., Mylopoulos, J.: Towards augmenting requirements models with
preferences. In: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Automated Software
Engineering (ASE 2009), Auckland, New Zealand, pp. 565-569 (2009)
4. Liaskos, S., McIlraith, S.A., Mylopoulos, J.: Integrating preferences into goal models for re-
quirements engineering. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Requirements Engineering
Conference (RE 2010), Sydney, Australia, pp. 135-144 (2010)
5. Dardenne, A., van Lamsweerde, A., Fickas, S.: Goal-directed requirements acquisition. Sci-
ence of Computer Programming 20(1-2), 3-50 (1993)
6. Yu, E.S.K., Mylopoulos, J.: Understanding “why” in software process modelling, analysis,
and design. In: Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference on Software Engineer-
ing (ICSE 1994), pp. 159-168 (1994)
7. Penserini, L., Perini, A., Susi, A., Mylopoulos, J.: High variability design for software agents:
Extending Tropos. ACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems (TAAS) 2(4)
(2007)
8. Gacek, C., Anastasopoules, M.: Implementing product line variabilities. SIGSOFT Software
Engineering Notes 26(3), 109-117 (2001)
